IRC chat logs for #ltsp on irc.freenode.net (webchat)


Channel log from 31 December 2009   (all times are UTC)

01:14elias_a has quit IRC
01:14Wastrel_ has quit IRC
01:24alkisg has joined #ltsp
02:15Kicer86 has joined #ltsp
02:31vagrantc has quit IRC
02:33alkisg has quit IRC
03:43alkis_web has joined #ltsp
04:36dmarkey has joined #ltsp
04:53alkis_web has left #ltsp
05:08hersonls has joined #ltsp
06:04Faithful has quit IRC
06:10Pulga has left #ltsp
06:11hersonls has quit IRC
06:11Egyptian[Home] has quit IRC
06:11Patina has quit IRC
06:11jhutchins_lt has quit IRC
06:11Appiah has quit IRC
06:11Kicer86 has quit IRC
06:11Sarten-X has quit IRC
06:11loather-work has quit IRC
06:11primeministerp has quit IRC
06:11sep has quit IRC
06:11jbrett has quit IRC
06:11pmatulis has joined #ltsp
06:11hersonls has joined #ltsp
06:11Kicer86 has joined #ltsp
06:11Sarten-X has joined #ltsp
06:11Egyptian[Home] has joined #ltsp
06:11loather-work has joined #ltsp
06:11Appiah has joined #ltsp
06:11jhutchins_lt has joined #ltsp
06:11sep has joined #ltsp
06:11primeministerp has joined #ltsp
06:11Patina has joined #ltsp
06:11jbrett has joined #ltsp
06:16Kicer86 has quit IRC
06:29cmm1 has joined #ltsp
06:38Egyptian[Home] has quit IRC
06:39Egyptian[Home] has joined #ltsp
07:50alkisg has joined #ltsp
07:56sene has quit IRC
07:56cmm1 has quit IRC
07:58cmm1 has joined #ltsp
07:59Gadi has joined #ltsp
08:01litlebuda has joined #ltsp
08:15cliebow__ has quit IRC
08:15cliebow__ has joined #ltsp
08:16Wastrel_ has joined #ltsp
08:28Topslakr has quit IRC
08:32sene has joined #ltsp
08:36Faithful has joined #ltsp
08:36sene has quit IRC
08:49cliebow__ has quit IRC
08:49cliebow__ has joined #ltsp
08:54
<sbalneav>
Morning all!
08:56
<Gadi>
!s
08:56
<ltspbot`>
Gadi: "s" :: Scotty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
08:57
<sbalneav>
Morning Gadi!!!!
08:57
<alkisg>
!g
08:57
<ltspbot`>
alkisg: "g" :: Gadi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
08:57
<alkisg>
easier ;)
08:58
But we should modify the bot to display more ! for users with higher karma :D
08:58
<sbalneav>
lol
09:32cliebow__ has quit IRC
10:01alexqwesa has joined #ltsp
10:04sene has joined #ltsp
10:04Selveste1 has quit IRC
10:11staffencasa has joined #ltsp
11:01shawnp0wers has joined #ltsp
11:11alkisg has quit IRC
11:15alkisg has joined #ltsp
11:24Selveste1 has joined #ltsp
11:25markit has joined #ltsp
11:26
<markit>
hi, I've debian sid and also a sid installation. My question is, to update the "ltsp client" part, do I have to chroot and aptitude update / aptitude full-upgrade? or what does ltsp-update-image do?
11:26
and also, is debian sid, ltsp server 5.1.96-1, use nfs or NDB?
11:26
(and how can I tell? is debian the only one that is still with nfs, if it is?)
11:27
<johnny>
debian can use both
11:27
if you don't use nbd, you don't need update-image
11:27
is there a reason you need to update the chroot?
11:27
if it's a major change, you should just delete the chroot and make a new onew
11:28
otherwise just chroot into it and apt-get upgrade/update
11:29
<markit>
johnny: I've a eeebox that does not boot in a lenny chroot installation, and wondering if an update will fix. I've a sid installation here, so I would try the update process in advance
11:29
hope that a update will take less time than a complete recreation
11:29
<johnny>
well.. try
11:29
chroot and update it
11:30
<markit>
I've read about a "mount -t proc none /proc" and a "mount -t proc proc /proc" in another place.. which is teh right one?
11:30
in addition, how can tell debian if use nfs or nbd?
11:30
<johnny>
if you didn't set nbd, it uses nfs
11:30
<markit>
I've read that ndb should perform better
11:30
<johnny>
sure.. but i don't know how to enable it on debian
11:31
the place is the chroot proc..
11:31
<markit>
yes
11:31
<johnny>
mount -t proc non /opt/ltsp/i386/proc
11:31
none*
11:31
<markit>
I've read to do so inside chroot, that's the shorter path
11:31
<sbalneav>
iirc, debian has a problem with the unionfs mount, which prevents it from being able to use nbd, or has that been fixed?
11:32
<markit>
johnny: so is "none" and not "proc", thanks
11:32
<johnny>
it doesn't matter
11:32
you could put proc
11:32
or anything else
11:32
<markit>
ah, I see
11:32
<sbalneav>
The documentation has a lot of this documented.
11:32
!docs
11:32
<ltspbot`>
sbalneav: "docs" :: For the most current documentation, see https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ltsp/index.php?title=Ltsp_LtspDocumentationUpstream
11:33
<sbalneav>
AH bug in the docs
11:33
<markit>
sbalneav: I tried a ltsp installation but since client-side usb pen drive mount was needed, we had to revert to Thinstation
11:33
<sbalneav>
mount -t proc /proc /proc
11:34
<markit>
do you know if has been fixed?
11:34
<sbalneav>
if what's been fixed?
11:34
mounting usb drives?
11:34
that's worked for yonks
11:34
<markit>
sbalneav: oh, an added '/', are you sure?
11:34
sbalneav: yes, mount client usb drivers
11:36
<sbalneav>
That's worked since the 4.2 days.
11:38
<markit>
sbalneav: sorry, but is not true
11:38
there have been a lot of troubles
11:38
I don't recall the details, but I had contacts with debian manteiners I've found in irc
11:39
and they confirmed the problem and that someone was (hopefully) working on it
11:39
btw, looking in the official documentatino and searching the site for "mount -t" returns only an article, not related with upgrade of chroot
11:40
<sbalneav>
You're looking at the upstream docs pdf?
11:41
It's on page 73
11:41
<markit>
sbalneav: ehm, no, the wiki you pointed me to
11:41
<sbalneav>
Did you download the upstream doc link that's ON the wiki page?
11:41
<markit>
btw, the "local media" trouble was for Windows RDP through ltsp boot of the thin client
11:42
<sbalneav>
Ah, that's Gadi's domain.
11:42
<markit>
sbalneav: I'm trying to find it on that page, maybe I'm blind :)
11:42
<sbalneav>
Yep, you must be
11:42
Got an 82 page pdf, right?
11:43
<markit>
sbalneav: no, I can't locate the pdf link
11:43
^F what to find it?
11:43
<Gadi>
you rnag?
11:43* markit depressed
11:43
<Gadi>
er, rang?
11:44
<sbalneav>
markit: you got the wiki page loaded?
11:44
!docs
11:44
<ltspbot`>
sbalneav: "docs" :: For the most current documentation, see https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ltsp/index.php?title=Ltsp_LtspDocumentationUpstream
11:44
<sbalneav>
^^ that one?
11:44
<markit>
Gadi: do you know if the rdp / ltsp local usb storage device has been fixed in debian (sid)?
11:44
<sbalneav>
the link to the pdf is, like, THE VERY FIRST LINK on the page.
11:44* Gadi knows not the ways of debian
11:44
<markit>
sbalneav: oh, so sorry, I was on the main page, thinking to be on your link one
11:45
<Gadi>
what version of ltspfs do they use?
11:45
<sbalneav>
"You can find the latest upstream documentation as a PDF here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/ltsp/files/Docs-Admin-Guide/LTSPManual.pdf/download"
11:45
<markit>
5.1.96-1
11:45
<Gadi>
thats LTSP not ltspfs
11:46
<markit>
0.5.13-1
11:46
<Gadi>
ah - should work
11:46
<markit>
thanks a lot to you both, I will give a try
11:46
<Gadi>
you need to install ltspfs in the chroot, and then redirect disk:drives=/media/root in rdesktop
11:46
<markit>
I've to run now, take children to an appointment
11:47
Gadi: redirect? how is it done? are "hot plug"?
11:47
<Gadi>
SCREEN_07 = "rdesktop -r disk:drives=/media/root ..... "
11:47
<markit>
oh, yes, thanks :)
11:48
<Gadi>
then, you should see a drives share in windows under which folders will appear for local devices
11:48
<markit>
thanks a lot, see you later, and happy new year :)
11:48
<Gadi>
u2
11:48markit has quit IRC
11:49Selveste1 has quit IRC
11:49
<sbalneav>
HNY Gadi, just in case you disappear later :)
11:50shawnp0wers has quit IRC
12:10alkisg has quit IRC
12:11{aaron} has joined #ltsp
12:14
<_UsUrPeR_>
hey all
12:14
has anybody ever set up an internal repository before? I'm having some issues
12:15shawnp0wers has joined #ltsp
12:15
<sbalneav>
I did, once, long long ago
12:16shawnp0wers has quit IRC
12:16
<{aaron}>
internal what repository?
12:16
<sbalneav>
http://www.debian-administration.org/article/Automatic_Debian_Package_Repository_HOWTO
12:16
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}, internal 9.10 ubuntu repository
12:17
<{aaron}>
oh. no.
12:17
<_UsUrPeR_>
woop! never mind, I got it
12:17
the issue was my sources.list on the client
12:17
I had /<site>/ubuntu/dists
12:17
I needed to take out /dists
12:17
:D
12:17
<sbalneav>
As with most things with the apt system, once you know the magic, things work perfectly
12:17* _UsUrPeR_ does a dance
12:17
<sbalneav>
it's knowing the magic
12:18
_UsUrPeR_: btw, sabayon-rc2 just got released.
12:18
<_UsUrPeR_>
sbalneav: ORLY?
12:18
is that for 9.10?
12:18
<sbalneav>
No, upstream
12:18
<_UsUrPeR_>
k
12:18
<sbalneav>
but I've got an rc1 in my ppa
12:18
<{aaron}>
maybe this is not the right channel but I figure you guys would be knowledgable: anybody know of good resources (FOSS software) for PXE booting thin clients to talk to MS terminal services? as far as I understand it MS doesn't provide any PXE option itself... i'm exploring turning a small windows network to thin clients (w/ FOSS/Linux of course)
12:19
<sbalneav>
rc2 won't affect any ubuntu users, it just adds selinux support for our fedora friends
12:19
{aaron}: ltsp does that through rdesktop support.
12:20
You just boot ltsp, and set SCREEN_07=rdesktop
12:20alkisg has joined #ltsp
12:20
<{aaron}>
sbalneav: i'd like to reuse existing fat client/desktop machines for now, so the question is, how do I get them a PXE image - do you advise just running an LTSP PXE server on the network?
12:20
i don't think i can turn the MS server into a PXE server (for free at least)
12:21
<sbalneav>
Yeah, just set up an ltsp server.
12:21
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: so to understand this, you want to boot a thinclient, then have it display a windows logon?
12:21
<{aaron}>
(I've also considered running all the server and desktops as images in virtualbxo on a linux server...but that's pushing it)
12:21
<sbalneav>
If you want stuff that runs on MS, you're on your own for that.
12:21
bbiab, lunch
12:22
<{aaron}>
_UsUrPeR_: well, yeah, a logon to a Windows client OS on the network, either through Terminal Services or some other magic
12:22litlebuda has quit IRC
12:23
<{aaron}>
the shame is that this whole network and all the hardware exist to serve 1 (windows) application :6
12:23
<alkisg>
...and it doesn't run under wine?
12:23
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: the best way to do that with PXE is to boot a client off LTSP, and have the terminal switch to rdesktop. It's INCREDIBLY easy to do
12:23
<{aaron}>
alkisg: haha, it barely runs under windows ...
12:23
_UsUrPeR_: ok cool, thanks :)
12:23
<alkisg>
{aaron}: that doesn't matter, I've seen old edu apps that run on wine but not on windows
12:24
(designed for 9x...)
12:24
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: start yourself off by installing an LTSP server. 9.10 alternate is my recommendation for a server with two NICs
12:24
<{aaron}>
alkisg: i'd probably run it under virtualbox before wine... there is paid support and stuff that i wouldn't want to violate (even if it doesn't make any sense)
12:24
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: If you are able to finish up before 5:00PM EST, I will be able to give you some pointers.
12:25
<alkisg>
{aaron}: sure, but with wine you'd be able to run it for all users, while on vbox just for one.
12:25shawnp0wers has joined #ltsp
12:25
<{aaron}>
alkisg: hmm, interesting, i'll check it out
12:25
<alkisg>
...and with much lower cpu/ram requirements. OK.
12:25
<{aaron}>
_UsUrPeR_: i'm not in a position to actually start right at the moment. would I need two NICs?
12:26
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: you don't need two NICs, but the alternate LTSP install for ubuntu assumes that you are running two NICs
12:26
<{aaron}>
alkisg: my perception of wine is pretty bad but that is from years ago so it's probably a lot better these days
12:26
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: one NIC will be for the network cloud, while the other NIC is dedicated to offering DHCP to booting clients.
12:26
<{aaron}>
ultimate goal: migrate off the shitty windows server. short term goal: reduce $$$ and maintenance problems
12:27
<alkisg>
{aaron}: I've been developing an edu app in Delphi for years. I used wine to port it to Linux. It's just fine, I don't need to rewrite it in a cross platform tool...
12:27
<_UsUrPeR_>
If you have a single NIC, you will have to manage your outside DHCP network to direct all MAC addresses for thinclients toward the LTSP server.
12:27
<{aaron}>
alkisg: not FreePascal, shame ;)
12:28
_UsUrPeR_: well, it's a closed network, not connected to the internet (yeah...), and the only machines subject to DHCP would be the clients I assume
12:28
<_UsUrPeR_>
{aaron}: hmm. So the server won't be online?
12:29
<{aaron}>
newp
12:29
<_UsUrPeR_>
that is required fr updates and building the LTSP client image...
12:29
s/fr/for
12:29
<alkisg>
Not if he uses the alternate cd
12:29
(the building part)
12:29
<_UsUrPeR_>
alkisg: you sho 'bout that?
12:29
<{aaron}>
yeah, I saw a tutorial on youtube, i'll probably have to temporarily connect it, or just build the machine elsewhere
12:29* _UsUrPeR_ capitualtes to alkisg's superior knowledge on the subject
12:30
<alkisg>
The alternate cd contains all the necessary packages for chroot building
12:30
<{aaron}>
cool
12:30
<alkisg>
(except for any langpacks needed etc)
12:31
<{aaron}>
i will probably get a copy of the program and try to test this all out in a local virtualbox network first
12:40
<alkisg>
Happy new year to all...
12:40alkisg has quit IRC
12:46
<_UsUrPeR_>
anyone active in ehre?
12:46
err here
12:47
when running an ltsp-build-client, what sources.list is used? It should be pulling from the local repository right now, but it's not.
12:52
<sbalneav>
Back from lunch
12:54
<johnny>
_UsUrPeR_, not unless you told it to copy the sources..
12:54
<sbalneav>
_UsUrPeR_: There's an option you'll have to pass to ltsp-build-client, --extra-dists I think, but I've had a glass of wine for lunch so don't quote me.
12:54
<johnny>
it uses the default from the install
12:54
no
12:54
<sbalneav>
Err
12:54
<johnny>
it's some --copy-sources-list ir soemthing
12:54
<sbalneav>
I had a glass of wine AT lunch
12:54
<johnny>
_UsUrPeR_, ltsp-build-client --extra-help
12:54
<sbalneav>
I had more than just the wine :)
12:55* sbalneav suspects everyone thinks I just drink bum-wine for lunch :)
12:55
<johnny>
mmm
12:55
<sbalneav>
Axctually
12:55
might make my sysadin job more bearable
12:56
<_UsUrPeR_>
I did run it as ltsp-build-client --arch i386 --copy-sourceslist
12:56
<johnny>
then it should be using it..
12:56
but did you actually look to make sure it did?
12:56
look in your chroot's sources.list
12:56
<_UsUrPeR_>
still building
12:56
:P
12:57
I'll check after it's done
12:57{aaron} has quit IRC
12:58
<johnny>
we should rename that var
12:58
--copy-extrarepos or somethingg..
12:58
the name is too debianish now
12:58
<_UsUrPeR_>
:)
12:59
it's detailing exactly what it does. I'm not familiar with debian nomenclature. Do they have vars named in an exacting basis like this?
13:00sene has quit IRC
13:01vagrantc has joined #ltsp
13:04Selveste1 has joined #ltsp
13:04
<johnny>
_UsUrPeR_, ltsp5 was mostly built on ubuntu.. and most of the debian/ubuntu bits have been cleaned out... but not all..
13:05* vagrantc notes that the first distro to release with ltsp5 was not ubuntu
13:05
<vagrantc>
though it was still called muekow
13:05
<_UsUrPeR_>
johnny: ahh. So is --copy-sourceslist a verbatim command from debian?
13:05
<vagrantc>
that's a crazy ubuntu command
13:05
<johnny>
no
13:05
it's an ltsp command to copy /etc/apt/sources.list
13:06
but.. it should be generic.. as we have similiar files in gentoo and fedora
13:06
<_UsUrPeR_>
ahh
13:13Selveste1 has quit IRC
13:17Selveste1 has joined #ltsp
13:18tstafford has quit IRC
13:19Lns has joined #ltsp
13:20tstafford has joined #ltsp
13:20japerry has quit IRC
13:23
<Lns>
Does anyone care to take a peek at these irc logs from yesterday ( http://logicalnetworking.net/other/LnsBotlogs/lns.log.30Dec2009 ) - do a search for "goals" and read from that line on..let me know what you think about it (communications library/socket for ltsp).. we're looking to do something like this and possibly get it included in Ubuntu 10.04 if possible..
13:24
<_UsUrPeR_>
Lns: will do :)
13:24
<Lns>
thanks!
13:24
<johnny>
there's also telepathy for that kinda thing Lns
13:24
<_UsUrPeR_>
lns: was that goals search a message from you to moldy?
13:24
<johnny>
using telepathy tubes would get you a dbus channel
13:25
also.. it'd be nice to have a slimmer zeroconf lib
13:25
than avahi
13:25
by default
13:25
<Lns>
hmm
13:25
<johnny>
Lns, here's something else for you to chew on tho
13:25
<Lns>
johnny: lemme take a look at telepathy
13:25
<johnny>
http://blog.fubar.dk/?p=108
13:25
Lns, read this bit first tho.. it's a bit easier
13:26
the important part for you is after "Finally, I did a really cute hack a few weeks ago - I made Palimpsest use D-Bus over TCP/IP over SSH to speak to udisks:"
13:26
altho you should read the whole thing anyways.. it's neat
13:26
<Lns>
_UsUrPeR_: yes
13:26
<johnny>
anybody interested in the future of disk management on linux should read that
13:28
<Lns>
johnny: would telepathy tubes be able to facilitate very fast/slim communications between computers for command+control (things like shutdown/reboot/shell commands/etc)?
13:29
we're talking about an ltsp server sending command requests to potentially hundreds of clients at a time
13:29
<johnny>
pretty sure Lns
13:29
all you're doing is faciliating networked dbus
13:30GGD has joined #ltsp
13:30
<Lns>
what would be the benefit of using those versus a piggybacked ssh connection like ltspfs?
13:31
<johnny>
because it's designed to do it up front?
13:32
Lns, look at the hackery done for password expiration and the like for ssh in ldm
13:32
we still don't use libssh (or whatever it is)
13:32
also
13:33
Lns, altho.. you could of course tunnel the dtube over ssh iirc
13:33
Lns, i really would like to see ltsp clients come with a daemon like avahi by default tho..
13:33
would make it easier to figure out which machine to talk to..
13:34
<sbalneav>
Lns: slim HAH
13:36
johnny: I looked in to libssh
13:36
using libssh would solve the password expiry screen scraping
13:37
<Lns>
hey sbalneav =) Any thoughts on this particular venture?
13:37
<sbalneav>
however, libssh DOESN'T support command sockets, so we'd have to completely re-implement command sockets ourselved.
13:38
Yeah, good freaking luck. I look forward to the code.
13:38
<johnny>
and that's why i thought dbus was a good idea..
13:38
err dtubes
13:38
<sbalneav>
I'm going to put it plainly as I can.
13:39
Everbody's got lots of ideas.
13:39
Don't mean crap 'till someone writes some code.
13:39
<johnny>
sometimes it takes awhile to hash out the idea ..
13:39
before you can write the code..
13:39
<sbalneav>
We've been hashing out this idea for 3+ years now.
13:40
<johnny>
sure.. but we still have trouble talking the same language on it
13:40
and what components should be part of it..
13:40
<Lns>
sbalneav: well yanqui seems to think it might not be too difficult.. we already had some basic command socket stuff going under python using netcat a few months ago..
13:40
<sbalneav>
I've been ripping apart gabriel and actually playing around with getting some code written.
13:41
Anything for LTSP's gonna have to be in C
13:41
<Lns>
right, and that's what he said this one would be written in
13:41
<sbalneav>
Not everbody's got dual core thin clients with 2 gigs of ram.
13:41
K, well, when I see it, I'll be a beleiver.
13:41
<Lns>
=)
13:41
i understand
13:42
<sbalneav>
People talked about how much better our lives would be if Sabayon only worked for 2+ years.
13:42
<Lns>
well...
13:42
that's a bit bigger of a project, too
13:42
<sbalneav>
Actually, no.
13:42
this is much bigger, and more complicated.
13:43
and nobody's done it yet.
13:43
there is
13:43
NO
13:43
NOTHING
13:43
<Lns>
even if it's done in the fashion of ltspfs regarding ssh sockets?
13:43
<sbalneav>
that currently allows you to tie multiple dbus' together
13:43
<Lns>
(just fyi i have no clue what i'm talking about ;) mainly repeating stuff)
13:44
<sbalneav>
ltspfs, as far as I'm concerned, shouldn't communicate over ssh, it should communicate over X atoms.
13:44
that way, if you tunnel the X over ssh, you get encryped ltspfs, if you use LDM_DIRECTX, then you get unencrypeted.
13:45
but Keith P and jammcq poo-poohed the idea, so I stopped it.
13:45
<Lns>
but for something "simple" such as basic commands from server -> client...
13:45dro has joined #ltsp
13:45
<Lns>
nothing high bandwidth that is
13:47
<sbalneav>
It's a BIG problem, because what you want to do is take things off the SYSTEM bus on the thin client, and put them on the SESSION bus on the users's session on the server.
13:47
But only CERTAIN KINDS of messages.
13:47
And maybe, if you have localapps, you want to DUPLICATE messages to multiple sources.
13:47
think firefox as a localapp.
13:48
you want the memory stick to appear for a file->save image as for the thin client,
13:48
but you ALSO want the memory stick to appear to the open office process on the server.
13:49
But you DON'T want device add signals for hal, for say, the video device becoming available, to get shoved onto the session bus, because nobody cares about that but the local thin client workstation.
13:49
It's FIENDISHLY difficult.
13:50
and there's going to be LOTS of ugly, ugly edge cases.
13:51
<Lns>
thanks for the insight sbalneav! it's much appreciated
13:51
<sbalneav>
I know I'm sounding like a negative nellie.
13:51
<Lns>
nah
13:51* vagrantc has been pretty happy with xatoms/xproperties so far
13:51
<Lns>
you're being realistic
13:51
<sbalneav>
But I want people to be realistic.
13:52
<vagrantc>
alkisg's shutdown using xatoms was so much simpler than any of the other proposals.
13:52
<sbalneav>
I keep hearing things like "DTUEBS WILL SOLVE ALL OUR PROBLEMZZZ!" or "JUST WRITE A DBUS CONNETOR DUUUDE", but it's NOT that simple.
13:52
sure,
13:52
<vagrantc>
tell it like it is!
13:53* vagrantc cheers on sbalneav
13:53
<Lns>
lol
13:53
<sbalneav>
and look how much dancing we have to go through to make xatoms work.
13:53
<vagrantc>
sbalneav: i feel like we have a common grumpitude not shared by a lot of folks
13:53
<sbalneav>
I'm getting old an pissy :)
13:53
<Lns>
get off my lawn!
13:53
<sbalneav>
dtubes is a great technology.
13:54
dbus is a great technology
13:54
<vagrantc>
sure beats fetishizing the newest shiny thing
13:54
<sbalneav>
but ALL THESE TECHNOLOGIES have been written with the COMPLETE IDEA of having one complete box with everything running on it locally.
13:54
NO ONE
13:54
IS THINKING
13:54
ABOUT THIN CLIENTS
13:55
anymore.
13:55
<Lns>
remote X period
13:55
<sbalneav>
and any of these technoligies we try to leverage/use
13:55
we're going to have to drag KICKING AND SCREAMING
13:55
into a remote X environment.
13:56
The stupid thing is, with the economy the way it is, and the environment the way it is, thing clients are MORE FREAKING RELAVENT than they've ever been before. But Linux has basically morphed into an OS that's almost thin-client hostile.
13:57
whew
13:57
</rant>
13:58
<dro>
sbalneav: do you think linux has been morphed that way because developers are trying to push it to be a desktop replacement?
13:58
<Lns>
dro: yes
13:58
yes yes and yes
13:58
<sbalneav>
Not just a desktop replacement.
13:58
a MICROSOFT replacement.
13:58
We don't seem to be interested in doing something stable/workable/functional
13:58
<Lns>
because that is peoples' main complaints - it's not windows.
13:59
and at the core, the issue is that people are afraid of change.
13:59
<sbalneav>
the only thing that seems to count these days is:
13:59
WE HAVE TO LOOK/BEHAVE like windows
13:59
take IceWM
13:59
Fantastic little windowmanager
13:59
light
13:59
simple
13:59
low on resources
13:59
<Lns>
case in point: http://techie-buzz.com/linux-distros/chinese-pirates-hacked-ubuntu-to-look-like-windows-xp.html
13:59
<sbalneav>
and now, completely and utterly useless
14:00
<dro>
i read an article on slashdot where a chinese group that in the past sold/released a ton of hacked winxp cd/software, have now switched to ubuntu but morph it so that it looks like winxp
14:00
<sbalneav>
cause it doesn't speak dbus/policykit/blahkit/fookit.
14:00
<dro>
LOL lns
14:00
<Lns>
sbalneav: not useless to those who don't need all that stuff...it's not like it got worse
14:00
it's just on its own path
14:01
like us :)
14:01
<dro>
Lns: what are the chances that we would post something about the same article lol
14:01
<Lns>
dro: cuz it was recent news :)
14:01
and we all read slashdot ;)
14:01
<sbalneav>
Lns: well, yeah, it IS useless, because now half the programs you'd want to run under it don't work correctly because they're expecting desktop DBUS integration
14:02
<johnny>
i read it the opposite that you do..
14:02
<Lns>
hrm
14:02
<johnny>
i think it's a good thing to convert the programs to do that
14:02
talkin about afraid of change..
14:03
<dro>
one of my customers recently demanded that i quit using linux in their network, they said it was insecure and their board members didn't like it, so I shut off the ltsp server and when I had 100+ tickets open that their systems no longer worked, I explained to the board that linux=functionality and to quit being afraid of technology
14:03
<Lns>
heh
14:03
<sbalneav>
johnny: converting programs only works if the tools to convert are there.
14:03
case in point
14:03
sabayon
14:03
<johnny>
sure.. but you already found a replacement
14:03
<sbalneav>
gksu's busted currently in lucid
14:04
I go to find out what can be done about this in ubuntu-devel
14:04
<johnny>
sure..and who's fault is that?
14:04
one individual developer
14:04
<sbalneav>
their answer, "convert to policykit"
14:04
OK, fine, so I go to look at policykit
14:04
<johnny>
why didn't they just turn gksu-policykit to gksu?
14:04
wouldn't that have directly solved the problem?
14:04
<sbalneav>
gksu-policykit isn't written yet.
14:04
it asks for the password ON THE COMMAND LINE.
14:04
<johnny>
then blame the ubuntu developers for pushing
14:05
something before it's ready
14:05
different problem
14:05
<Lns>
that's par though johnny
14:05
<sbalneav>
lemme finish the story
14:05
<johnny>
sbalneav, you already told the story to me didn't you? this is for somebody else's benefit?
14:05
<sbalneav>
so, I go to look for policykit bindings for python
14:05
for the other people listening
14:05* Lns is listening
14:05
<johnny>
Lns, well.. it has been par.. it doesn't have to be
14:06
it's ubuntu that gets the bad PR flack for it
14:06
<sbalneav>
there AREN'T any policykit bindings for python "How do I convert to policykit then?" I ask
14:06
"Well, either talk raw dbus to PK, or if you'd like to write bindings....?" is the answer.
14:07
So, FreeDesktop.org is pushing solutions to problems that THEY HAVEN;T EVEN FULLY WRITTEN yet.
14:07
this isn't Ubuntu's problem specifically, it's endemic to Linux, at the moment.
14:08
<johnny>
freedesktop.org isn't pushing anything..
14:08
blame fedora :)
14:08
<Lns>
sounds like FD needs to pay more attention to the community as a whole?
14:08
<johnny>
Lns, it's fedora that makes the freedesktop specs often
14:08
then they push them as solutions in fedora
14:08
or rather.. in gnome
14:08
<sbalneav>
Well, all the major distros cite "FREEDESKTOP.ORG SEZ...", so who's pushing it then?
14:08
SOMEONE's pushing it.
14:09
<Lns>
So the tower gets taller and taller, until it falls over eventually
14:09
linux is NOT a monolith
14:09
<johnny>
Lns, i don't think it's quite that bad.. it did get us dbus , shared-mime-info, and a bunch of other important tools
14:09
<Lns>
and should never be treated as such
14:09
<johnny>
i feel like folks are looking at teh wrong places that are causing the problems here..
14:09
especially folks who don't see the fedora -> fdo -> gnome cycle
14:10
<Lns>
it's hard when you have increasingly fewer bodies making decisions for an entire software ecosystem
14:10
<johnny>
Lns, fdo is for defacto specs, not actual specs.. ..
14:10
which is what is happening..
14:10
<Lns>
right
14:10
<sbalneav>
johnny: ok, so how do we solve it?
14:10
<Lns>
people are treating them as actual specs though
14:10
<johnny>
Lns, and i think it's gave us alot of good
14:10
most of the time
14:10
<Lns>
not arguing that johnny =)
14:11
<sbalneav>
I'd argue the opposite.
14:11
<johnny>
sbalneav, for one.. make sure you're in touch with people like davidz
14:11
<Lns>
but it's causing a lot of harm to those they aren't considering
14:11
<johnny>
and the gnome developers on gnome-hackers
14:11
<sbalneav>
compared to 5 years ago, I have MORE problems with Linux than I used to.
14:11
<johnny>
many of them who are fedora developers..
14:11
<sbalneav>
WAY more.
14:11
<johnny>
sbalneav, except you couldn't do half the stuff you can do now..
14:11
<Lns>
with more functionality comes greater complexity
14:11
<johnny>
without lots of cli stuff
14:11
yep
14:11
<sbalneav>
BUT THE STUFF I COULD DO WORKED>
14:11
<johnny>
lol
14:11
<Lns>
hehe...i see that point well
14:11
<sbalneav>
Now, I can do lots of things
14:11
<johnny>
plenty of stuff i want to do is much better now
14:12
like gstreamer..
14:12
<sbalneav>
all at 80% functionality.
14:12
<johnny>
i <3 gstreamer
14:12
we need more actual developers to keep the conversion train rolling then
14:12
and more developers who care about thin clients who work on softwar relevant to thin clients
14:12
<sbalneav>
right, and that brings us around to my origial comment.
14:12
<Lns>
LTSP needs to be heard more in the community, we need exposure
14:12
<sbalneav>
ideal walk, code talks.
14:12
<johnny>
Lns, ... heard doesn't help..
14:12
<Lns>
we are a good case for consideration of "alternate" uses of linux
14:12
<sbalneav>
ideas, sorry
14:13
<johnny>
Lns, actually being involved in developing the programs that affect ltsp..
14:13
that's what helps
14:13
<Lns>
it all helps johnny
14:13
<johnny>
or indoctrinating
14:13
Lns, as sbalneav ideas walk, code talks
14:13
<Lns>
i understand...for those who can't code, they need to do something
14:13
<johnny>
Lns, then they need to talk directly to the coders
14:13
<Lns>
ideas only form into code when they are ideas first
14:13robbie_ has joined #ltsp
14:14
<Lns>
right
14:14
<johnny>
and that's what's not happening
14:14
<Lns>
which is what i'm doing right now ;)
14:14
<johnny>
no.. you're talkin to the wrong people
14:14
you need to talk to the people like davidz
14:14
and warren
14:14
warren can make some stuff happen
14:14
he told me to yell for him we feel redhat is running roughshod over the community process
14:14
<Lns>
how about we e-mail them this log?
14:15
<johnny>
which is what happened when hal first came about
14:15
Lns, .. no.. please.. no logs :)
14:15
<Lns>
heh
14:15
<johnny>
take the logs and make them coherent points
14:15
<Lns>
i can write blogs about this, though i might be inaccurate to some point...i have ideas and ideals for linux which i think i share with all of you guys
14:16
<johnny>
Lns, so.. one good thing to do.. would bring more redhat folks into ltsp
14:16
<Lns>
brb..
14:17
<johnny>
Lns, but who is your blog audience?
14:17
that is teh question..
14:18
too many people write blogs about problems that just gather a bunch of ill formed people.. and folks who are scared of "bloat"
14:19
<Lns>
johnny: the point is to write a blog and send it to the people who can make a difference (warren/davidz/etc)
14:19
<johnny>
or.. instead
14:19
talk to them directly.. so you are writing exactly the truth
14:19
and then write a blog about the result..
14:20
<Lns>
whatever though... i can write a blog then blog about talks with them about it too
14:21
the important thing is to communicate the ideas
14:21
so before i start on this in a couple of minutes, pushing my appointment to do some work at a school for this, what are our main points here?
14:22
That Linux/X/Gnome are getting too "single desktop" centric?
14:22
that no attention is being paid to the roots of what X is supposed to be capable of?
14:22
that developers are forgetting why *nix has survived longer than most any other OS and trying to mimic OSes that tend to pay most attention to market share?
14:23
That people are too interested in ease of use rather than real power and flexibility with technology?
14:25
<dro>
sounds like you nailed it to me
14:27
<Lns>
Let me quote "In the beginning there was the command line"...
14:27
<johnny>
Lns, i don't think that is the right way to phrase it..
14:27
<Lns>
(I love this excerpt)
14:27
<johnny>
nor do i think it is true
14:27
nothing is exactly single desktop centric on purpose
14:28
it's not like they tried to do it
14:28
it's just a consequence of the development cycle atm until things stabilize a bit more
14:28
what i'm seeing, is more things going back to the roots
14:29
via the removal of hal
14:29
and the new xorg stuff
14:29
<Lns>
http://pastebin.com/m260ddd77
14:29
johnny: i agree with you as well...these new technologies are very immature still imo, obviously since there are basic issues such as backward compatibility
14:30
<johnny>
it can easily happen when you try to do too much in a 6 month cyle
14:30
<Lns>
heh
14:30
<johnny>
but it's hard not to do 6 months either.. as people want more updates :)
14:31
look wat happened with the kernel before they kept a rolling 2.6
14:31
and the 2.{odd,even}
14:31
you had tons of custom patched kernels, everybody had them
14:31
patches that never made it upstream, because by the time they could be applied.. they no longer applied :)
14:32
<Lns>
maybe a point is to cut back on drastic changes even though you have a 6mo. cycle...
14:32
<johnny>
because the merge window was too long
14:32
sure.. but the distros can't choose that
14:32
<Lns>
exercise some restraint
14:32
<johnny>
for example..
14:32
how many upstream developers does canonical actually employ?
14:32
compared to redhat
14:32
it seems obvious as to why redhat is driving the train
14:33
<Lns>
that is an illusion
14:33
<johnny>
huh?
14:33
<Lns>
gnu/linux is outside of any single body
14:33
<johnny>
upstream to gnome especially ...
14:33
sure..but this is about what sfotware is available by the time distros package the software
14:33
you're mostly right
14:34
but not about gnome
14:34
and the kernel
14:34
the rest of the software.. yes.. kernel and gnome..no
14:34
and infra freedesktop stuff..
14:35
Lns, technologies like network manager and policykit are mainly developed by redhat developers
14:35
<Lns>
it seems as though debian is the one entity that really seems to humble this mentality
14:35
<johnny>
or were in their intiial
14:35
initial phases*
14:36
<Lns>
so redhat starts these projects then drops them
14:36
<johnny>
drops?
14:36
<Lns>
to let the community seal the leaks
14:36
<johnny>
dan williams still works on networkmanager
14:36
davidz still works on policykit
14:37
it's not that they drop anything.. it's just that they have other responsibilities too
14:37
so some stuff gets left by the wayside
14:37
<Lns>
where are the rest of the developers ? why are there only single people doing this that affect so many?
14:37
what needs to happen for redhat to collaborate better?
14:37
<johnny>
because everybody else is busy? not enough programmers?
14:37
<Lns>
pssh
14:37
<johnny>
Lns, imo canonical should put some people to work on helping faciliate transistions
14:37
then you wouldn't have these problems
14:38
<Lns>
bah
14:38
<johnny>
i'm sure ogr a would disagree tho..
14:38
<Lns>
we're looking too much up to these companies
14:38
<johnny>
Lns, few other people have the time and knowledge to do some of the heavy stuff
14:38
<Lns>
we're losing the forest for the trees
14:38
<johnny>
somebody has to get paid to do it right sometimes
14:38
right?
14:38
you don't do what you do for free do ya? :)
14:39
all the time at least :)
14:39
<Lns>
but when you put paid people in control of a free ecosystem, then it becomes a paid ecosystem.
14:39
<johnny>
Lns, one solution.. would be to setup a consulting company to help
14:39
Lns, look at collabora
14:39
the people behind telepathy
14:39
and gstreamer a bit as well
14:39* Lns owns a consulting company
14:40
<johnny>
sure.. but who's paying you to do upstream work ..
14:40
you're an integrator.. that's different
14:40
altho some of your stuff does go upstream.. it's not the main point.. it's to deploy what is already written
14:40
right?
14:40
<Lns>
people pay me to integrate...i use that money to help with upstream work
14:40
<johnny>
sure.. but one thing would be to get paid directly for upstream work
14:41
<Lns>
that's the wrong method imo
14:41
i know what you mean though
14:41
<johnny>
yet it's not
14:41
collabora is doing very well
14:41
and i'm happy with what they have came up
14:41
and that spanish company who did alot of the other gstreamer work
14:41
<Lns>
and look at *us*
14:42
#ltsp
14:42
<johnny>
Lns, most of these projects (to my eye) seem written by companies collaborating
14:42
sure.. it's actually very similiar with ltsp :)
14:42
<Lns>
exactly.
14:42robbie_ has quit IRC
14:42Wastrel_ has quit IRC
14:42Patina has quit IRC
14:42jhutchins_lt has quit IRC
14:42pmatulis has quit IRC
14:42Appiah has quit IRC
14:42hersonls has quit IRC
14:42Selveste1 has quit IRC
14:42staffencasa has quit IRC
14:42primeministerp has quit IRC
14:42sep has quit IRC
14:42jbrett has quit IRC
14:42loather-work has quit IRC
14:42Sarten-X has quit IRC
14:42
<johnny>
to what i just said :)
14:42
<Lns>
so we nee....*rides the wave*
14:42
<johnny>
except our environment involves elements of all the other ones
14:42
that's the major problem here... our issues are with everything they do :)
14:43
<Lns>
so we need to become closer with all of the upstream projects.
14:43
<johnny>
yes
14:43
<Lns>
we need to communicate more with them
14:43hersonls has joined #ltsp
14:43
<johnny>
yes
14:43
<Lns>
and vise versa obviously
14:43
<johnny>
sure.. but first we have to convince them that we matter
14:43
<Lns>
and we do that through evidence of our "client base"...we need to talk their talk as well
14:44
we need an actual body that represents the LTSP community as a whole
14:44
<johnny>
Lns, for example.. ibet you could convince warren to get together some of the redhat employees that are relevant to our issues :)
14:44
<Lns>
that would be great
14:44
but who's going to talk to them about our issues?
14:45
we have no hierarchy
14:45
<johnny>
we don't need one
14:45cmm1 has quit IRC
14:45
<johnny>
just a list of teh issues we have
14:46
and how we might solve them given our constraints
14:46
<Lns>
how do we compile an all encompassing list that gives a voice to everyone involved without much assumption?
14:46
<johnny>
Lns, for example.. i suggested something like having avahi like daemon included by default in ltsp
14:47
all encompassing isn't as important up front.. as solving some of te issues solve others
14:47
<Lns>
true
14:47
<johnny>
so.. perhaps we might see a way to slim the daemon by 2/3rds or something..
14:47
or even just find a way to split the lib into a min version..
14:47
whatever..
14:50
Lns, so.. more directly modifying upstream projects to fit our needs.. while fitting the original ones..
14:50
instead of dealing with what they push out
14:51
Lns, so.. to summarize.. a proactive position vs a reactionary one
14:52hersonls has quit IRC
14:52
<Lns>
sure
14:53
but to educate upstreams to our existence is necessary as well, so modifications aren't always necessary as they already cater to more of a generic environment
14:53
removes backpedal
14:53
both are necessary
14:53Selveste1 has joined #ltsp
14:53staffencasa has joined #ltsp
14:53Sarten-X has joined #ltsp
14:53loather-work has joined #ltsp
14:53sep has joined #ltsp
14:53primeministerp has joined #ltsp
14:53jbrett has joined #ltsp
14:55
<Lns>
we need to be included in their "spheres of consciousness" so we can avoid these predicaments in the first place
14:55
and we can adopt new technologies as they come out more readily
14:55robbie_ has joined #ltsp
14:55Wastrel_ has joined #ltsp
14:55pmatulis has joined #ltsp
14:55Appiah has joined #ltsp
14:55jhutchins_lt has joined #ltsp
14:55Patina has joined #ltsp
14:56
<Lns>
the problem is, their spheres revolve around established entities more than niche communities like us
14:56
so, imho, a good thing to think about might be to create an established entity for the ltsp community, so we can be represented better
14:58
we all sort of revolve around the ideals of what has always been important in *nix
14:58shawnp0wers has quit IRC
14:58
<Lns>
inter-compatibility and flexibility based on small tools
14:59
<johnny>
i don't think tha'ts necessarily changed.. only the names and the tools :)
14:59
<Lns>
look at polkit
14:59
<johnny>
look at hal
14:59
hal appeared.. it was huge
14:59
got huger
14:59
then got split
14:59
same thing will happen to polkit
15:00
same thing that happened to xorg
15:00
<Lns>
my point is, people come up with these huge elaborate solutions that they can't handle by themselves, and the result is a huge growing pain for the community at large
15:00
<johnny>
eventually the same will happen to the linxu kernel itself
15:00
<Lns>
and it's not always necessary - look at us for example
15:00
<johnny>
eventually the linux kernel will be split, mark my words.. it'll end up as some sort of micro kernel
15:00
<Lns>
we don't do anything huge and elaborate
15:01
i agree
15:01
<johnny>
Lns, well is more peeps worked on polkit from the beginning.. it could have been cleaned during development
15:01
polkit was meant to solve a problem
15:01
the gnome team accepted it as it was
15:01
and that's how it went down
15:02
<Lns>
so, if ltsp community was closely tied to the gnome community, we could have spoken up and said "hey! what about xyz...that's gonna be a HUGE issue."
15:03dro has quit IRC
15:03
<Lns>
imo we have to remind everyone else about why it's not always a good idea to adopt early and fix bugs later
15:04
we represent some pretty extensive and large networks of computers that people depend on
15:06
ltsp networks are normally very mission critical (hospitals for example)...we can't be directed by some guy at RH that says "well xyz software sure seems like it can fix stuff, as long as everyone adopts it!" and throws it in Fedora for people to trip over
15:06
<johnny>
Lns, i really doubt you'll have good luck with that
15:06
better at making them right in the first place..
15:06
<Lns>
exactly.
15:08
<johnny>
and it involves people getting involved nearer the beginning..
15:09
<Lns>
yep
15:11
it also involves people exercising consideration for an entire ecosystem instead of their own distro
15:11
to realize their actions affect everyone, just like dropping a pebble in a pond
15:12
it's so interesting to see how far linux has come
15:12
we've become this paradoxical entity, representing an entire system as well as many individual systems
15:14
and to me anyway, ltsp is in between the two...we're like the ether that facilitates an interconnectedness of individual systems, but outside the main system
15:21robbie_ has quit IRC
15:44vagrantc has quit IRC
15:54Gadi has left #ltsp
16:35
<Ahmuck>
http://www.helpmysql.org/
16:38prpplague has joined #ltsp
16:44jelly-bean has joined #ltsp
16:44
<jelly-bean>
thin client boots but when you try to login it just comes back to the login screen
16:44
is there an error log i can find somewherE?
16:45grey-monkey has joined #ltsp
16:48
<Lns>
For those interested: http://blog.logicalnetworking.net/index.php/lnsblogs/my-viewpoint-of-the-ltsp-project-and-cor?blog=5
16:48
jelly-bean: sure you're using the right username/password?
16:49
jelly-bean: have you changed IP addresses of the LTSP server?
16:49
<jelly-bean>
well we just created 4 users and none of them work
16:50
trying a fake user to see if its a dif. response
16:50
doesnt matter what we type same result
16:50
it goes to the black terminal then restarts the gdm
16:52
on we have a read-only filesystem
16:52
it must be the way we setup our nfs
16:53
<Lns>
could be..have you checked server logs?
17:03prpplague is now known as prpplague_afk
17:08
<Lns>
johnny: you wanna send that link along to davidv and warren? :)
17:08
<jelly-bean>
nope that wasnt' teh prob
17:08
Lns: where are the server logs
17:09
<Lns>
jelly-bean: /var/log
17:09
<jelly-bean>
nothing is really showing up
17:10
daemon.log and syslog have stuff
17:10
but its just like ... here i'll pastebin
17:10
<Lns>
jelly-bean: did you happen to change your server IP?
17:10
<jelly-bean>
pastebin.com/d4640855a
17:10
Lns since when? yes possibly
17:11
<Lns>
jelly-bean: did you run ltsp-update-sshkeys after you changed it?
17:12
those logs don't show anything relevant i don't think
17:13
<jelly-bean>
ok just ran that cmd on serverand restarted thinclient
17:13
but same result
17:14
does hardware matter
17:14
server is running a quad core
17:14
the clients are duo and single core
17:15
<Lns>
you're running nfs you said?
17:15
<jelly-bean>
ya
17:15
well technically
17:16
xenserver + nfs
17:16
<Lns>
k
17:16
<jelly-bean>
and ubuntu ltsp is a domU
17:16
so ubuntu shouldnt know the dif
17:16
and the ltsp server is working
17:16
ah rebuilding the client solved it
17:16
rebuilding the image*
17:16
<Lns>
hrm..well in my exp. the only things that make ldm restart like that is either a bad password or needing to ltsp-update-sshkeys
17:17
if you're running nfs you don't need to ltsp-update-image...
17:17
<jelly-bean>
no the ubuntu ltsp server is running in a virtualized env
17:17
it doesnt know anything about nfs
17:18
its the emulator that is using nfs
17:21
<Lns>
oh
17:22
well then run ltsp-update-image after ltsp-update-sshkeys, then reboot the client
17:22
<jelly-bean>
ok next q
17:22
security and cloning user profiles
17:22
i dont want users getting into other user's stuff
17:22
i guess this falls under general linux admin
17:24jelly-bean has quit IRC
17:25
<Lns>
check out sabayon, specifically sbalneav's ppa (he's lead dev on that) for user profile management
17:25jelly-bean1 has joined #ltsp
17:29vagrantc has joined #ltsp
17:30grey-monkey has left #ltsp
17:34
<Lns>
Happy new year all!! I'm outta heeeeere
17:34Lns has quit IRC
17:37
<sbalneav>
Evening all
17:40* vagrantc waves
17:44* ogra wishes a happy 2010 !
17:45
<ogra>
yay tim,ezones
17:45jelly-bean1 has quit IRC
17:47alkisg has joined #ltsp
17:49
<alkisg>
Happy new year to all from Greece :)
17:55shawnp0wers has joined #ltsp
17:58
<sbalneav>
alkisg: Ευτυχισμένο το Νέο Έτος
17:59
(or so google translate tells me)
17:59
<alkisg>
Why thank you, that was a perfect translation :)
17:59* sbalneav takes the babel fish out of his ear
18:00
<alkisg>
Heh, another Douglas Adams reader... :)
18:01
I really enjoyed all the 5 books in that series
18:05
<sbalneav>
The world lost a great author, with a very keen insight into the human condition.
18:06
heh
18:06
The Boghog is the only native animal of planet NowWhat, "all other having long ago died of despair".
18:10
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
18:10
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
18:31Selveste1 has quit IRC
18:37alkisg has quit IRC
19:14F-GTSC has quit IRC
19:34ogra has quit IRC
19:42GGD has quit IRC
19:48ogra has joined #ltsp
20:13GGD has joined #ltsp
20:34F-GT has joined #ltsp
20:36pmatulis has quit IRC
20:55shawnp0wers has quit IRC
21:22mushroomblue has quit IRC
21:26vagrantc has quit IRC
21:33mushroomblue has joined #ltsp
22:12ltspbot has joined #ltsp
22:12sbalneav has joined #ltsp
22:39
<cyberorg>
Happy New Year folks :)
22:40
<sbalneav>
Happy new year!
22:45
<stgraber>
still 15 minutes to go here ;)
22:50
<cyberorg>
stgraber, then what you you doing on IRC, you should be out having fun!!
22:50
<sbalneav>
We're sad, sad people :)
23:02
<stgraber>
yeah, 2010 ! Still an hour to go for sbalneav though ;)
23:02Sarten-X has quit IRC
23:02
<sbalneav>
stgraber: Bon Annee!
23:03
<stgraber>
sbalneav: merci
23:03
<sbalneav>
Whoops
23:03
Sorry
23:03
Bonne
23:03
My french is tres rusty :)
23:04
<stgraber>
hehe, no problem, that grammar mistake is easily understandable from an english speaker ;)
23:41GGD has quit IRC
23:53alkisg has joined #ltsp